"A line drive straight to my face" By Ashley Pais

[Sweet Lou]

Yes, actually it is quite valid. Not necessarily a question of better off but what would have happened had she been wearing a mask. Yes a mask would have prevented much of the facial trauma but to where would that energy have been dissipated? Based on the her account even with a mask she would not have walked away from this.

That's kind of like asking if someone not wearing a seat belt and thrown through a windshield in a car crash would have been better off had they been wearing a seat belt. Sure they still would have had injuries but I'm 99% certain they would not have been nearly as severe.

 

[riseball]

I just don't agree with that assessment riseball- she does not have permanent traumatic brain injury from the injury (likely because the fragile facial bones collapse and partially absorb the transmitted energy). She has residual pain and PTSD caused by the extent of the fracture damage and resulting surgeries. This would have been prevented with either a full or partial face mask

To date my DD has knocked out 1 umpire and 2 catchers with pitches in the high 60's. One of the catchers was out for over 2 months before she was cleared. To suggest that a player with a lightweight, flimsy wire fielders mask would emerge unscathed is ludicrous and show a basic lack of understanding of physical science. Would anyone suggest that a catcher us a fielders mask in lieu of a full face helmet? Of course not. I find it amazing that people somehow feel that a fielders mask in and of itself is adequate protection and that players will not be affected by a full force hit that is well in excess of a pitched ball.

 

[riseball]

That's kind of like asking if someone not wearing a seat belt and thrown through a windshield in a car crash would have been better off had they been wearing a seat belt. Sure they still would have had injuries but I'm 99% certain they would not have been nearly as severe.

No actually more like would they have been better off with just a seat belt or a seat belt and a full face helmet? Would you prefer the injuries described or a fracture at C3-C4?

 

[bucket pinata]

catchers masks and umpires masks don't collapse.so it is not surprising that one of the catchers had to recover from a concussion. The fielders mask does fold lessening the impact, like crush panels on a car. You will suffer some injury wearing a mask on a dead center liner. but I've read and heard many stories about the damage unmasked pitchers have suffered while not wearing one. still looking for the I was wearing a mask and got my face blown up article or account. So you can either believe a masked pitcher has never been hit(seen it myself) or maybe just maybe they work.

To date my DD has knocked out 1 umpire and 2 catchers with pitches in the high 60's. One of the catchers was out for over 2 months before she was cleared. To suggest that a player with a lightweight, flimsy wire fielders mask would emerge unscathed is ludicrous and show a basic lack of understanding of physical science. Would anyone suggest that a catcher us a fielders mask in lieu of a full face helmet? Of course not. I find it amazing that people somehow feel that a fielders mask in and of itself is adequate protection and that players will not be affected by a full force hit that is well in excess of a pitched ball.

 

[Sweet Lou]

No actually more like would they have been better off with just a seat belt or a seat belt and a full face helmet? Would you prefer the injuries described or a fracture at C3-C4?

I'm really not sure what your point is.

If it is that face masks will not prevent 100% of the damage and or injuries then sure I'll agree to that. I'm sure the girl in question might still have gotten a concussion and or some other facial injuries had she been wearing a mask. A trip the ER might even still have been required. But I'm also 99.9% confident that the injuries would have been far less severe and she would have had a much shorter recovery time and quite probably avoided the facial reconstruction surgery including the addition of several permanent plates.

 

[Cannonball]

So is the argument now that she would have been hurt anyway and so why wear the mask? Unbelievable.

Riseball, why not let us know where you dd is playing. I'd love to see her throw since she throws in the upper 60s. That is far better than the girls that have been pitching lately on ESPN. The other day, the one girl from Oklahoma was throwing 62-65 mph. That same speed was consistent for the Georgia game the other night. Upper 60s is amazing. Heck, she can collapse mask. I caught a dozen or more guys that played professionally and was often hit in the mask by one young man who hit 90s all the time. He pitched in MLB for a long time. Never once did I get a concussion or have a mask collapse.

 

[riseball]

I'm really not sure what your point is.

If it is that face masks will not prevent 100% of the damage and or injuries then sure I'll agree to that. I'm sure the girl in question might still have gotten a concussion and or some other facial injuries had she been wearing a mask. A trip the ER might even still have been required. But I'm also 99.9% confident that the injuries would have been far less severe and she would have had a much shorter recovery time and quite probably avoided the facial reconstruction surgery including the addition of several permanent plates.

My point is that you are dealing with a piece of gear that is void of any standards of performance, and that based on the design there may very well be unforeseen consequences when wearing one. Given the risk the protection afforded is minimal and may only be part of a comprehensive solution. Unfortunately some seem to feel that fielders masks as designed provide a much higher level of protection and have unrealistic expectations of performance. It reminds me of the unrealistic expectations of noobs when wearing body armor. It does not make you bulletproof and even working as designed you can still end up in a world of hurt. Yes, it is better than nothing, but still falls short.

 

[riseball]

So is the argument now that she would have been hurt anyway and so why wear the mask? Unbelievable...

Not at all. Quite a leap to suggest that.

 

[fastpitchdad8]

The responses in this thread seem to be some of the most ludicrous that I've read on this forum. And that's saying alot.

fixed it for you. Crazy stuff

 

[Sweet Lou]

My point is that you are dealing with a piece of gear that is void of any standards of performance, and that based on the design there may very well be unforeseen consequences when wearing one. Given the risk the protection afforded is minimal and may only be part of a comprehensive solution. Unfortunately some seem to feel that fielders masks as designed provide a much higher level of protection and have unrealistic expectations of performance. It reminds me of the unrealistic expectations of noobs when wearing body armor. It does not make you bulletproof and even working as designed you can still end up in a world of hurt. Yes, it is better than nothing, but still falls short.

So because it is not perfect you shouldn't wear one? That's just crazy.

Again it does not provide 100% protection but it has prevented numerous injuries and my DD will continue to wear one until such time as there is a credible study showing they offer little to no protection.

You can do what you like but your position has little to no basis in reality as far as I can tell.

And if you ask a police officer or soldier if they'd prefer to go in to a situation where there will likely be facing fire I'm sure the vast majority will opt to go in with body armor instead of without when given the choice even if it may fail against armor piercing rounds or other scenarios.